The Aftermath of the Trial

[PaulS1950]

'
Can't you read? I have said over and over, I don't know if Zimmerman is innocent or not.

I assert that no one else truly knows what happened, either.

Virtually everything written in these leagues and leagues of emotional, prejudiced invective, pro and con, is simply meaningless trash, from the point of view of what objectively happened.

You people are incapable of separating your emotions from rational evaluations, and are totally unworthy to be citizens of a free republic.

So you richly deserve what you have gotten.

.

You either didn't watch the trial, didn't believe the evidence submitted or were incapable of discerning the validity and importance of the evidence.
There is a "Universal Law" that states: You can only know what you experience.
While I am a believer in that law I can accept that Paris exists, that there is an Atlantic ocean and that George Zimmerman is innocent of any crime associated with this case.

Any responsible person with an IQ at or above the national median should be able to discern Zimmerman's innocence or at least accept the jury's verdict.
I may be wrong about the IQ part it is sometimes difficult for me to predict the actions of those who are below a 170 quotient.

 

[PMZ]

'
Can't you read? I have said over and over, I don't know if Zimmerman is innocent or not.

I assert that no one else truly knows what happened, either.

Virtually everything written in these leagues and leagues of emotional, prejudiced invective, pro and con, is simply meaningless trash, from the point of view of what objectively happened.

You people are incapable of separating your emotions from rational evaluations, and are totally unworthy to be citizens of a free republic.

So you richly deserve what you have gotten.

.

You either didn't watch the trial, didn't believe the evidence submitted or were incapable of discerning the validity and importance of the evidence.
There is a "Universal Law" that states: You can only know what you experience.
While I am a believer in that law I can accept that Paris exists, that there is an Atlantic ocean and that George Zimmerman is innocent of any crime associated with this case.

Any responsible person with an IQ at or above the national median should be able to discern Zimmerman's innocence or at least accept the jury's verdict.
I may be wrong about the IQ part it is sometimes difficult for me to predict the actions of those who are below a 170 quotient.

I think that you assume that you have "an IQ at or above the national median".

Another rush to judgement.

Most Americans don't like folks to get away with murder. Clearly what happened in this case. He'll never be free from that fact.

 

[PMZ]

Why would anyone believe that that for which there is insufficient evidence to prove illegality is "all that matters"?

Maybe because one is presumed innocent until they are proven guilty?
You remember, our whole judicial system is based on that premise.
If there is not enough evidence to convict someone then the presumption of innocence remains.

In this case not only was there not enough evidence to convict Zimmerman on any of the charges but the preponderance of evidence completely agreed with his account of the events in question.

He was found not guilty of any crimes - thus the presumption of innocence remains.

He eliminated the only reliable witness. You seem to think that the lack of any legal defense of TM, and the lack of any reliable witnesses, revealed, not obscured, reality. Extremely unlikely.

 

[Pop23]

Why would anyone believe that that for which there is insufficient evidence to prove illegality is "all that matters"?

Maybe because one is presumed innocent until they are proven guilty?
You remember, our whole judicial system is based on that premise.
If there is not enough evidence to convict someone then the presumption of innocence remains.

In this case not only was there not enough evidence to convict Zimmerman on any of the charges but the preponderance of evidence completely agreed with his account of the events in question.

He was found not guilty of any crimes - thus the presumption of innocence remains.

He eliminated the only reliable witness. You seem to think that the lack of any legal defense of TM, and the lack of any reliable witnesses, revealed, not obscured, reality. Extremely unlikely.

Keep your head in the sand as long as you want if it makes you feel better. Evidence and the Justice system works for me.

 

[numan]

He eliminated the only reliable witness.

Thank you for saying in one short sentence what the people here are so determined not to understand.

.

 

[numan]

Can't you read? I have said over and over, I don't know if Zimmerman is innocent or not.

I assert that no one else truly knows what happened, either.

Virtually everything written in these leagues and leagues of emotional, prejudiced invective, pro and con, is simply meaningless trash, from the point of view of what objectively happened.

You people are incapable of separating your emotions from rational evaluations, and are totally unworthy to be citizens of a free republic.

So you richly deserve what you have gotten.

At least you admit to not being able to assess the evidence and come to a conclusion. Good thing you weren't on the jury.

That is another silly thing to write.

Had I been on the jury I would have been forced to vote for acquital, since there is not sufficient evidence to determine what happened in the incident, and so there must be a reasonable doubt that Zimmerman committed murder or manslaughter.

Had there been an alternative charge of criminal stupidity against Zimmerman, I would have voted for the maximum penalty which that hypothetical law might allow -- there is certainly sufficient evidence to convict Zimmerman of that !!

Not to mention convict most of the people on this thread !!

.

 

[Gadawg73]

Can't you read? I have said over and over, I don't know if Zimmerman is innocent or not.

I assert that no one else truly knows what happened, either.

Virtually everything written in these leagues and leagues of emotional, prejudiced invective, pro and con, is simply meaningless trash, from the point of view of what objectively happened.

You people are incapable of separating your emotions from rational evaluations, and are totally unworthy to be citizens of a free republic.

So you richly deserve what you have gotten.

At least you admit to not being able to assess the evidence and come to a conclusion. Good thing you weren't on the jury.

That is another silly thing to write.

Had I been on the jury I would have been forced to vote for acquital, since there is not sufficient evidence to determine what happened in the incident, and so there must be a reasonable doubt that Zimmerman committed murder or manslaughter.

Had there been an alternative charge of criminal stupidity against Zimmerman, I would have voted for the maximum penalty which that hypothetical law might allow -- there is certainly sufficient evidence to convict Zimmerman of that !!

Not to mention convict most of the people on this thread !!

.

Takes one to know one!

 

[Pop23]

Can't you read? I have said over and over, I don't know if Zimmerman is innocent or not.

I assert that no one else truly knows what happened, either.

Virtually everything written in these leagues and leagues of emotional, prejudiced invective, pro and con, is simply meaningless trash, from the point of view of what objectively happened.

You people are incapable of separating your emotions from rational evaluations, and are totally unworthy to be citizens of a free republic.

So you richly deserve what you have gotten.

At least you admit to not being able to assess the evidence and come to a conclusion. Good thing you weren't on the jury.

That is another silly thing to write.

Had I been on the jury I would have been forced to vote for acquital, since there is not sufficient evidence to determine what happened in the incident, and so there must be a reasonable doubt that Zimmerman committed murder or manslaughter.

Had there been an alternative charge of criminal stupidity against Zimmerman, I would have voted for the maximum penalty which that hypothetical law might allow -- there is certainly sufficient evidence to convict Zimmerman of that !!

Not to mention convict most of the people on this thread !!

.

Justice is blind. She did the right thing. Deal with it.

 

[PMZ]

Justice is blind. She only deals with hard evidence. Sometimes that's insufficient. Especially when all contrary evidence has been eliminated.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

The governor should be recalled and Angela Corey should be disbarred. BTW, they're both Republicans.

 

[Oldstyle]

For GZ's story to be the whole truth, one must believe that he was a random victim. He did nothing to provoke, he just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.

I am incredulous that people would accept that as a reasonable position. There may be no evidence that demonstrates beyond a reasonable doubt that that could be the case, but common sense says that it is so unlikely as to be virtually impossible.

Clearly the legal standard defies common sense.

Why must Zimmerman be a "random victim"? Trayvon Martins attack on Zimmerman wasn't random...it was targeted. Martin profiled Zimmerman as a "creepy assed Cracker" right before he walked back and confronted him. Martin made a conscious decision to punch someone in the face for following him. It wasn't random...it was a deliberate act. It wasn't something that arose out of a discussion that grew increasingly heated. Martin escalated the situation to physical violence when he threw that first punch. EVERYTHING that happened after that point was due to HIS actions.

 

[Oldstyle]

Can't you read? I have said over and over, I don't know if Zimmerman is innocent or not.

I assert that no one else truly knows what happened, either.

Virtually everything written in these leagues and leagues of emotional, prejudiced invective, pro and con, is simply meaningless trash, from the point of view of what objectively happened.

You people are incapable of separating your emotions from rational evaluations, and are totally unworthy to be citizens of a free republic.

So you richly deserve what you have gotten.

At least you admit to not being able to assess the evidence and come to a conclusion. Good thing you weren't on the jury.

That is another silly thing to write.

Had I been on the jury I would have been forced to vote for acquital, since there is not sufficient evidence to determine what happened in the incident, and so there must be a reasonable doubt that Zimmerman committed murder or manslaughter.

Had there been an alternative charge of criminal stupidity against Zimmerman, I would have voted for the maximum penalty which that hypothetical law might allow -- there is certainly sufficient evidence to convict Zimmerman of that !!

Not to mention convict most of the people on this thread !!

.

You know what, Numan? You seem to be of the opinion that you're intelligent. I hate to break this to you, Sparky...but I've not seen anything in your posts here that would back that up. You can't argue the real law so you make up hypothetical ones? Just what is the penalty for "criminal stupidity"? Is that a felony or a misdemeanor?

 

[Gadawg73]

At least you admit to not being able to assess the evidence and come to a conclusion. Good thing you weren't on the jury.

That is another silly thing to write.

Had I been on the jury I would have been forced to vote for acquital, since there is not sufficient evidence to determine what happened in the incident, and so there must be a reasonable doubt that Zimmerman committed murder or manslaughter.

Had there been an alternative charge of criminal stupidity against Zimmerman, I would have voted for the maximum penalty which that hypothetical law might allow -- there is certainly sufficient evidence to convict Zimmerman of that !!

Not to mention convict most of the people on this thread !!

.

You know what, Numan? You seem to be of the opinion that you're intelligent. I hate to break this to you, Sparky...but I've not seen anything in your posts here that would back that up. You can't argue the real law so you make up hypothetical ones? Just what is the penalty for "criminal stupidity"? Is that a felony or a misdemeanor?

The media's case sold to the gullible sheep was hypothetical law which was what the indictment was based on to begin with.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Can't you read? I have said over and over, I don't know if Zimmerman is innocent or not.

I assert that no one else truly knows what happened, either.

Virtually everything written in these leagues and leagues of emotional, prejudiced invective, pro and con, is simply meaningless trash, from the point of view of what objectively happened.

You people are incapable of separating your emotions from rational evaluations, and are totally unworthy to be citizens of a free republic.

So you richly deserve what you have gotten.

At least you admit to not being able to assess the evidence and come to a conclusion. Good thing you weren't on the jury.

That is another silly thing to write.

Had I been on the jury I would have been forced to vote for acquital, since there is not sufficient evidence to determine what happened in the incident, and so there must be a reasonable doubt that Zimmerman committed murder or manslaughter.

Had there been an alternative charge of criminal stupidity against Zimmerman, I would have voted for the maximum penalty which that hypothetical law might allow -- there is certainly sufficient evidence to convict Zimmerman of that !!

Not to mention convict most of the people on this thread !!

.

It wasn't silly but an accurate statement that you yourself made.

You claimed to not know GZ's guilt or innocence. If you're reviewed all the evidence and testimony then a conclusion should be easy to consider.

But now it seems you walked back your previous assertion of "not knowing" and would find GZ not guilty.

 

[Oldstyle]

As soon as this trial began and the Prosecution's witnesses took the stand it was obvious that this case should have never been taken to court in the first place. How many criminal cases have you ever seen where the Defense didn't need to call it's OWN witnesses because the Prosecution's proved their case so thoroughly? The State of Florida wasted millions putting on this "show trial" and now the Federal Government is going to waste millions more with a charade of a civil rights investigation.

Numan now states that he'd be "forced" to find George Zimmerman not guilty as if it's a fault of the system. The "fault" lies in people that refused to accept that this wasn't a racially motivated "crime" carried out by a gun nut, cop wannabe when the evidence overwhelmingly showed that it wasn't! The "fault" lies in a main stream media who pushed a "narrative" of an innocent teen needlessly slain by a racist adult when the facts totally contradicted that!

 

[Wake]

Is it grasping at the wind to want to hold our media accountable for their actions? They went quite a bit out of their way to distort the facts. They manipulated us. Lied to us. Pitted us against one another. They are the ones that dumped gas on the fire. It was their goal to play us like fools. And, they mostly suceeded.

 

[PMZ]

Is it grasping at the wind to want to hold our media accountable for their actions? They went quite a bit out of their way to distort the facts. They manipulated us. Lied to us. Pitted us against one another. They are the ones that dumped gas on the fire. It was their goal to play us like fools. And, they mostly suceeded.

I believe that they reported the facts as they were revealed. Many here are grasping at what they wish was true. That George Zimmerman's testimony was the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, rather than the well developed and highly practiced play that it was, available to the trial because TM wasn't.

If FL had decided not to prosecute, their reputation as a red neck state would have been forever sealed. Probably below that of Texas. This outcome is only a little better.

America has moved on from frontier justice. Florida, not so much, yet.

 

[numan]

He eliminated the only reliable witness.

Thank you for saying in one short sentence what the people here are so determined not to understand.

Considering the intransigent irrationality of so many people who are so certain that they know what happened in this incident -- despite the fact that they cannot know that -- I have been inspired to start a thread in the Law Forum :

The Credibility of George Zimmerman

Feel free to comment there -- if you dare.

.

 

[hoosier88]

Is it grasping at the wind to want to hold our media accountable for their actions? They went quite a bit out of their way to distort the facts. They manipulated us. Lied to us. Pitted us against one another. They are the ones that dumped gas on the fire. It was their goal to play us like fools. And, they mostly suceeded.

(My bold)

The press is given Constitutional privilege, on the theory that a free press is necessary. The MSM has always been problematic, they're typically owned by one side or the other. The trend since the '60s of media consolidation & the accompanying urge to make all assets produce money, has been v. bad for the news. Just like People magazine & USA Today, all corporate assets must contribute to the bottom line.

Thus Fox & their bastard step-relations are entertainment venues first, with good income stats first, & Devil take the hindmost.

The moral is that the criminal courts function in the courts, & nowhere else. You might as well look to McDonald's to give you balanced, long-term healthy food for you & yours. That's not what they're about, they're about making a profit for their shareholders. So too the MSM - think of it as fast news, & don't expect anything except the occasional shot of cleavage & cute animals. & now this ...

 

[BobPlumb]

He eliminated the only reliable witness.

Thank you for saying in one short sentence what the people here are so determined not to understand.

Considering the intransigent irrationality of so many people who are so certain that they know what happened in this incident -- despite the fact that they cannot know that -- I have been inspired to start a thread in the Law Forum :

The Credibility of George Zimmerman

Feel free to comment there -- if you dare.

.

You might want to start with a little research about memory and eye witness testimony in general. To save people some trouble I will give a brief summery -- it sucks.